Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39391505›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2024

The efficacy and safety of remimazolam tosilate compared with propofol for endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography under monitored anesthesia care: A single-center randomized controlled clinical trial.

Biyun Zhou, Shiyong Li, Ailin Luo, Hongbo Zheng

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 10 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Biyun ZhouDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Shiyong LiDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Ailin LuoDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.
Hongbo ZhengDepartment of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, Hubei Key Laboratory of Geriatric Anesthesia and Perioperative Brain Health, and Wuhan Clinical Research Center for Geriatric Anesthesia, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Although remimazolam tosilate is an ultra-short-acting benzodiazepine that causes less respiratory and circulatory depression than propofol, studies evaluating its efficacy and safety during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) are limited. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of remimazolam and propofol for ERCP performed under monitored anesthesia care (MAC). Methods: This study is a randomized controlled clinical trial featuring a noninferiority design. A total of 102 eligible patients undergoing ERCP under MAC were randomly assigned to either the remimazolam tosilate group (R group) or the propofol group (P group) in a 1:1 ratio. Patients in the R group were sedated with remimazolam tosilate, while those in the P group received propofol, both under MAC. The primary efficacy endpoint was the success rate of ERCP completion under MAC. Secondary outcomes included the time to loss of consciousness, sedative effects, and perioperative adverse events at various time points for patients in both groups. Results: Baseline characteristics of both groups were similar. The successful completion rate for ERCP under MAC was 100 % in the R group and 96.1 % in the P group, resulting in a difference of 3.92 % (95 % CI: -2%, 10 %). This difference met the pre-established criterion of being greater than -8%. The total number of norepinephrine infusions, as well as the incidence of intravenous injection pain, post-induction hypotension, post-induction bradycardia, intraoperative hypotension, respiratory depression, and hypoxemia, were significantly lower in the R group compared to the P group. Conversely, the total number of phloroglucinol uses, body movements, and instances of rapid gastrointestinal peristalsis were significantly higher in the R group than in the P group. Discussion: Remimazolam-based MAC for ERCP exhibited non-inferior efficacy compared to propofol-based MAC, while also resulting in fewer circulatory and respiratory adverse events during the procedures. Nevertheless, future studies with larger sample sizes are required to evaluate the utility of remimazolam in elderly patients.

Indexed as

Adverse eventsEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographyHypotensionMonitored anesthesia carePropofolRemimazolam

Identifiers

PMID39391505
PMCPMC11466613

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.